AngioDynamics, Inc. v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al

Filing 454

ORDER: as to evidentiary rulings regarding witnesses Ingold, Patil, and Kokotis. Signed by Chief Judge Brenda K. Sannes on 9/22/2022. (Attachments: # 1 Additional rulings for Witness Ingold) (nmk)

AngioDynamics v. Bard, N.D.N.Y. 17-598
Bard's September 17, 2022 Submission to Court

Name of Deponent
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack

Case 1:17-cv-00598-BKS-CFH Document 454 Filed 09/22/22 Page 1 of 8

Bard's Corrected and Revised Objections and Counter-Designations to AngioDynamics' 9/13/2022 Affirmative Designations
AngioDynamics'
Bard's Objections to Affirmative
Affirmative
Bard's Counter-Designations
Date of Testimony
Designations
Designations
May 17, 2022
198:1 – 198:13
May 17, 2022
355:14-21
354:20-355:13
May 17, 2022
357:17-357:22
Vague, lacks foundation
May 17, 2022
358:2-358:3
May 17, 2022
358:5-358:9
May 17, 2022
358:12-358:17
May 17, 2022
358:19-359:9
May 17, 2022
359:10-359:15
Cumulative; asked and answered.
May 17, 2022
359:18-360:3
Cumulative; asked and answered.
May 17, 2022
360:5-360:20
Cumulative
May 17, 2022
360:21-361:3
Cumulative
May 17, 2022
361:6-361:9
Cumulative
May 17, 2022
361:11-361:15
Leading; misleading the jury
May 17, 2022
361:17-361:20
May 17, 2022
361:22-362:5

Ingold, Jack

May 17, 2022

Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Ingold, Jack
Kokotis, Kathy
Kokotis, Kathy

May 17, 2022
May 17, 2022
May 17, 2022
May 17, 2022
May 17, 2022
May 17, 2022
May 17, 2022
May 17, 2022
May 17, 2022
May 17, 2022
May 17, 2022
May 17, 2022
May 17, 2022
January 10, 2020
January 10, 2020

Court’s Ruling

Overruled

Overruled
Overruled
Sustained
Sustained
Sustained
Sustained
Sustained
(remove question
above as well)

362:7-362:7

Leading; misleading the jury

362:9-363:19

Objection to 362:9-20 - Leading; misleading the
jury

Sustained

Foundation
Foundation
Foundation
Foundation

Overruled
Overruled
Overruled
Overruled

Foundation; hearsay
Foundation; hearsay

Sustained
Sustained

Foundation; hearsay

Sustained

363:20-364:19
364:20-364:21
365:2-365:16
365:18-365:21
366:2-366:2
366:4-366:6
366:10-366:15
366:20-367:18
367:19-368:11
368:12-368:21
369:2-369:4
369:6-369:9
4:19 -4:21
12:3 -12:23

AngioDynamics v. Bard, N.D.N.Y. 17-598
Bard's September 17, 2022 Submission to Court

Name of Deponent

Kokotis, Kathy

Kokotis, Kathy

Kokotis, Kathy

Kokotis, Kathy

Kokotis, Kathy

Case 1:17-cv-00598-BKS-CFH Document 454 Filed 09/22/22 Page 2 of 8

Date of Testimony

January 10, 2020

January 10, 2020

January 10, 2020

January 10, 2020

January 10, 2020

AngioDynamics'
Bard's Objections to Affirmative
Affirmative
Bard's Counter-Designations
Designations
Designations
Bard Obj. to P-217, 401/402 - Relevance
(AngioDynamics argues relevant to product
differentiation and motive; no evidence that any
45:15 -46:11
product differentiation based on coatings were
relevant to Bard's motivation for its TLS
policy), 801/802 - Hearsay, 611 (foundation)
Bard Obj. to P-217, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
47:22 -47:25, 48:2 -48:7, 48:10 -48:11, 401/402 Relevance (AngioDynamics argues relevant to
product differentiation and motive; no evidence
47:22 -47:25
that any product differentiation based on
coatings were relevant to Bard's motivation for
its TLS policy), 611 (lacks foundation), 801/802 189:14-189:25, 190:3-190:16, 190:18190:25, 191:2-191:6, 191:8-191:10
(hearsay)
Bard Obj. to P-217, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
47:22 -47:25, 48:2 -48:7, 48:10 -48:11, 401/402 Relevance (AngioDynamics argues relevant to
product differentiation and motive; no evidence
48:2 -48:7
that any product differentiation based on
coatings were relevant to Bard's motivation for
its TLS policy), 611 (lacks foundation), 801/802 189:14-189:25, 190:3-190:16, 190:18190:25, 191:2-191:6, 191:8-191:10
(hearsay)
Bard Obj. to P-217, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
47:22 -47:25, 48:2 -48:7, 48:10 -48:11, 401/402 Relevance (AngioDynamics argues relevant to
product differentiation and motive; no evidence
48:10 -48:11
that any product differentiation based on
coatings were relevant to Bard's motivation for
its TLS policy), 611 (lacks foundation), 801/802 189:14-189:25, 190:3-190:16, 190:18190:25, 191:2-191:6, 191:8-191:10
(hearsay)
Bard Obj. to P-217, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm
49:3-7 - 401/402 - Relevance (AngioDynamics
argues relevant to product differentiation and
49:3 -49:7
motive; no evidence that any product
differentiation based on coatings were relevant
to Bard's motivation for its TLS policy), 403
49:23-49:24, 50:2-50:11
(prejudice, confusion)

Court’s Ruling

Overruled

Sustained
(hearsay)

Overruled

Overruled

Sustained

AngioDynamics v. Bard, N.D.N.Y. 17-598
Bard's September 17, 2022 Submission to Court

Name of Deponent

Kokotis, Kathy

Kokotis, Kathy

Kokotis, Kathy

Kokotis, Kathy

Kokotis, Kathy

Case 1:17-cv-00598-BKS-CFH Document 454 Filed 09/22/22 Page 3 of 8

Date of Testimony

January 10, 2020

January 10, 2020

January 10, 2020

January 10, 2020

January 10, 2020

AngioDynamics'
Bard's Objections to Affirmative
Affirmative
Bard's Counter-Designations
Designations
Designations
Bard Obj. to P-217, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
50:12-51:2, 401/402 - Relevance
(AngioDynamics argues relevant to product
differentiation and motive; no evidence that any
50:12 -50:25
product differentiation based on coatings were
relevant to Bard's motivation for its TLS
policy), 403 (prejudice, confusion), 611 (lacks
foundation)
Bard Obj. to P-217, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
51:3-15, 401/402 - Relevance (AngioDynamics
argues relevant to product differentiation and
51:2 -51:15
motive; no evidence that any product
differentiation based on coatings were relevant
to Bard's motivation for its TLS policy), 403
(prejudice, confusion)
Bard Obj. to P-217, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
53:8 -53:25, 54:2 -54:13, 401/402 - Relevance
(AngioDynamics argues relevant to product
53:8 -53:25
differentiation and motive; no evidence that any
product differentiation based on coatings were
relevant to Bard's motivation for its TLS
54:14-54:15, 54:17-54:17
policy), 403 (prejudice, confusion)
Bard Obj. to P-217, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
53:8 -53:25, 54:2 -54:13, 401/402 - Relevance
(AngioDynamics argues relevant to product
54:2 -54:13
differentiation and motive; no evidence that any
product differentiation based on coatings were
relevant to Bard's motivation for its TLS
policy), 403 (prejudice, confusion)
Bard Obj. to P-217, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
54:18 -54:25, 55:2 -55:13, 401/402 - Relevance
(AngioDynamics argues relevant to product
differentiation and motive; no evidence that any
54:18 -54:25
product differentiation based on coatings were
relevant to Bard's motivation for its TLS
policy), 403 (prejudice, confusion), 611 (lacks
foundation)

Court’s Ruling

Overruled

Overruled

Overruled

Overruled

Overruled

AngioDynamics v. Bard, N.D.N.Y. 17-598
Bard's September 17, 2022 Submission to Court

Name of Deponent

Date of Testimony

Kokotis, Kathy

January 10, 2020

Kokotis, Kathy

January 10, 2020

Kokotis, Kathy

January 10, 2020

Kokotis, Kathy

January 10, 2020

Kokotis, Kathy

January 10, 2020

Kokotis, Kathy

January 10, 2020

Kokotis, Kathy

January 10, 2020

Kokotis, Kathy

Kokotis, Kathy

Case 1:17-cv-00598-BKS-CFH Document 454 Filed 09/22/22 Page 4 of 8

January 10, 2020

January 10, 2020

AngioDynamics'
Bard's Objections to Affirmative
Affirmative
Bard's Counter-Designations
Designations
Designations
Bard Obj. to P-217, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
54:18 -54:25, 55:2 -55:13, 401/402 - Relevance
(AngioDynamics argues relevant to product
differentiation and motive; no evidence that any
55:2 -55:13
product differentiation based on coatings were
relevant to Bard's motivation for its TLS
policy), 403 (prejudice, confusion), 611 (lacks
foundation)
Bard Obj. to P-117, 401/402 - Relevance, 403 56:16 -56:25
Confusing/Prejudicial
Bard Obj. to P-117, 401/402 - Relevance, 403 57:2 -57:25
Confusing/Prejudicial
Bard Obj. to P-117, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
58:2 -58:11
58:2-11, 401/402 - Relevance, 403 (prejudice,
confusion), 611 (vague)
Bard Obj. to P-117, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
58:12 -58:25, 59:2 -59:4, 401/402 - Relevance,
58:12 -58:25
403 (prejudice, confusion), 602 (speculation),
611 (compound, vague)
Bard Obj. to P-117, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
58:12 -58:25, 59:2 -59:4, 401/402 - Relevance,
59:2 -59:4
403 (prejudice, confusion), 602 (speculation),
611 (compound, vague)
Bard Obj. to P-117, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
59:5 -59:10
59:5-10, 401/402 - Relevance, 403 (prejudice,
confusion), 611 (vague, lacks foundation)
Bard Obj. to P-117, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
59:11-59:12, 59:14 -59:20, 59:24 -59:25, 60:2 60:8, 60:23 -60:25, 61:3 -61:17, 401/402 59:11 -59:12
Relevance, 403 (prejudice), 611 (vague, lacks
foundation)
Bard Obj. to P-117, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
59:11-59:12, 59:14 -59:20, 59:24 -59:25, 60:2 60:8, 60:23 -60:25, 61:3 -61:17, 401/402 59:14 -59:20
Relevance, 403 (prejudice), 611 (vague, lacks
foundation)

Court’s Ruling

Overruled

Overruled
Overruled
Sustained

Sustained

Sustained

Sustained

Sustained

Sustained

AngioDynamics v. Bard, N.D.N.Y. 17-598
Bard's September 17, 2022 Submission to Court

Name of Deponent

Kokotis, Kathy

Kokotis, Kathy

Kokotis, Kathy

Case 1:17-cv-00598-BKS-CFH Document 454 Filed 09/22/22 Page 5 of 8

Date of Testimony

January 10, 2020

January 10, 2020

January 10, 2020

Kokotis, Kathy

January 10, 2020

Kokotis, Kathy

January 10, 2020

Kokotis, Kathy

January 10, 2020

Kokotis, Kathy

January 10, 2020

Kokotis, Kathy

January 10, 2020

Kokotis, Kathy

January 10, 2020

AngioDynamics'
Bard's Objections to Affirmative
Affirmative
Bard's Counter-Designations
Designations
Designations
Bard Obj. to P-117, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
59:11-59:12, 59:14 -59:20, 59:24 -59:25, 60:2 60:8, 60:23 -60:25, 61:3 -61:17, 401/402 59:24 -59:25
Relevance, 403 (prejudice), 611 (vague, lacks
foundation)
Bard Obj. to P-117, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
59:11-59:12, 59:14 -59:20, 59:24 -59:25, 60:2 60:8, 60:23 -60:25, 61:3 -61:17, 401/402 60:2 -60:8
Relevance, 403 (prejudice), 611 (vague, lacks
foundation)
Bard Obj. to P-117, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
59:11-59:12, 59:14 -59:20, 59:24 -59:25, 60:2 60:8, 60:23 -60:25, 61:3 -61:17, 401/402 60:23 -60:25
Relevance, 403 (prejudice), 611 (vague, lacks
foundation)
Bard Obj. to P-117, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
59:11-59:12, 59:14 -59:20, 59:24 -59:25, 60:2 60:8, 60:23 -60:25, 61:3 -61:17, 401/402 61:3 -61:17
Relevance, 403 (prejudice), 611 (vague, lacks
foundation)
Bard Obj. to P-117, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
61:18 -62:5
61:18-62:5, 401/402 (relevance), 403
(prejudice, confusion)
Bard Obj. to P-117, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
62:6 -62:17
62:6-17, 401/402 (relevance), 403 (prejudice,
confusion)
Bard Obj. to P-117, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
63:6-63:14, 401/402 (relevance), 403
63:6 -63:14
(prejudice, confusion), 602 (misstates prior
testimony)
Bard Obj. to P-117, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
63:15 -63:25
63:15 -63:25, 64:2 -64:3, 401/402 (relevance),
403 (prejudice, confusion)
Bard Obj. to P-117, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
64:2 -64:3
63:15 -63:25, 64:2 -64:3, 401/402 (relevance),
403 (prejudice, confusion)

Court’s Ruling

Sustained

Sustained

Sustained

Sustained

Sustained
Overruled

Sustained

Sustained
Sustained

AngioDynamics v. Bard, N.D.N.Y. 17-598
Bard's September 17, 2022 Submission to Court

Case 1:17-cv-00598-BKS-CFH Document 454 Filed 09/22/22 Page 6 of 8

Kokotis, Kathy
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin

January 10, 2020
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022

AngioDynamics'
Bard's Objections to Affirmative
Affirmative
Bard's Counter-Designations
Designations
Designations
Bard Obj. to P-117, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
65:3 -65:15
63:15 -63:25, 64:2 -64:3, 401/402 (relevance),
403 (prejudice, confusion)
Bard Obj. to P-117, Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm.
72:9 -72:12
63:15 -63:25, 64:2 -64:3, 401/402 (relevance),
403 (prejudice, confusion), 602 (speculation)
Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm. 72:13-73:10, 72:23 72:13 -72:21
73:3, 403 (prejudice, confusion), 602
(speculation)
Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm. 72:13-73:10, 72:23 72:23 -73:3
73:3, 403 (prejudice, confusion), 602
(speculation)
Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm. 150:13-150:16,
150:18-150:25, 151:2-151:17, 401/402
150:13 -150:16
(relevance), 602 (speculation, assumes facts not
in evidence), 611 (lacks foundation)
Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm. 150:13-150:16,
150:18-150:25, 151:2-151:17, 401/402
150:18 -150:25
(relevance), 602 (speculation, assumes facts not
150:4-150:12
in evidence), 611 (lacks foundation)
Bard Obj. to Angio Affirm. 150:13-150:16,
150:18-150:25, 151:2-151:17, 401/402
151:2 -151:17
(relevance), 602 (speculation, assumes facts not
150:4-150:12
in evidence), 611 (lacks foundation)
5:3-5:5
25:2-25:12
52:12-52:14
52:16-52:25
53:2-53:14
misstates testimony
59:25-60:14
60:15-60:19
60:21-61:2

Patil, Nitin

April 19, 2022

101:11-102:14

Name of Deponent

Date of Testimony

Kokotis, Kathy

January 10, 2020

Kokotis, Kathy

January 10, 2020

Kokotis, Kathy

January 10, 2020

Kokotis, Kathy

January 10, 2020

Kokotis, Kathy

Kokotis, Kathy

January 10, 2020

January 10, 2020

misstates testimony, assumes facts

101:7-9, 102:15-19, 102:22

Court’s Ruling
Overruled
Overruled
Sustained
Sustained

Overruled

Overruled

Overruled

Overruled
Overruled, but
incomplete
designation
(missing question
or should start on
line 12)

AngioDynamics v. Bard, N.D.N.Y. 17-598
Bard's September 17, 2022 Submission to Court

Case 1:17-cv-00598-BKS-CFH Document 454 Filed 09/22/22 Page 7 of 8

Name of Deponent

Date of Testimony

Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin

April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022

Patil, Nitin

April 19, 2022

Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin

April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022

AngioDynamics'
Bard's Objections to Affirmative
Affirmative
Designations
Designations
103:24-104:13
107:16-109:13
testimony discusses exhibit not introduced in
122:23-123:10
deposition designations
125:15-125:21
126:4-126:14
misstates document
126:18-127:5
misstates document
127:7-127:7
129:9-129:16
132:17-133:7
133:9-134:9
speculation, improper hypothetical
140:20-140:24
speculation, improper hypothetical
141:3-141:14
142:2-142:9
153:15-154:7
156:10-156:14
vague, misstates testimony
163:3-163:10
vague, misstates testimony
167:6-167:16
vague, misstates testimony
200:22-201:10
201:13-201:16
201:18-201:23
202:8-202:15
215:4-215:7
217:17-217:19
speculation
220:7-220:10

Patil, Nitin

April 19, 2022

220:13-220:17

Patil, Nitin

April 19, 2022

220:19-220:19

Patil, Nitin

April 19, 2022

223:9-223:13

Patil, Nitin

April 19, 2022

228:4-228:12

Patil, Nitin

April 19, 2022

230:11-231:6

speculation
speculation
P-223 - 801/802 - Hearsay (e.g., page 3-4,
"Spent about 45 minutes on the phone with
Mark on Wednesday..."; page 2, "As I recalle
there was an 'Allegation' of an air embolism...";
page 1, "Anectodately, we are told..."401/402 Relevance; 403 - Waste of TIme/Confusion
speculation, misstates document

Bard's Counter-Designations

Court’s Ruling

109:20-22, 109:24-110:2
Sustained
125:22-25
Overruled
Overruled

Sustained
Sustained

Overruled
Overruled
Overruled

Sustained
Sustained as to
220:13
Overruled

Overruled

Sustained as to
228:8-12

AngioDynamics v. Bard, N.D.N.Y. 17-598
Bard's September 17, 2022 Submission to Court

Case 1:17-cv-00598-BKS-CFH Document 454 Filed 09/22/22 Page 8 of 8

Name of Deponent

Date of Testimony

Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin
Patil, Nitin

April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022
April 19, 2022

AngioDynamics'
Affirmative
Designations
232:2-232:14
237:21-237:25
239:6-239:10
239:14-239:18
245:25-246:22
255:13-255:17
255:19-255:20
256:15-256:17
258:13-258:20
258:22-258:23
259:5-259:6
259:9-259:25
263:6-263:21
269:9-270:11
273:11-274:12
277:6-277:9
281:4-281:17

Patil, Nitin

April 19, 2022

288:13-289:16

Bard's Objections to Affirmative
Designations

Bard's Counter-Designations

Court’s Ruling

misstates document, misstates testimony
speculation
speculation

237:6-20, 238:2-17

Overruled
Overruled
Overruled

speculation

Overruled
270:12-271:3

beyond geographic scope ("all over the world")
403 - prejudicial, 401/402 - irrelevant, violates
assurance that designations would be "targeted
to elements of AngioDynamics' case" (ECF
356)
287:21-288:6, 289:21-290:3

Dated: September 22, 2022

Sustained
Sustained